Northwest Airlines, Inc.

Plain-English summary

An airline workers' union objected to an ALJ order approving a settlement between OSHA and Northwest Airlines. The union said it had requested party status but was not notified of the settlement or given an opportunity to participate before approval. Because the ALJ's settlement order had already become final, the Commission explained that relief could be granted only under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The Commission referred the matter back to the judge to decide whether relief from the final order was appropriate.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): None. This order concerns party-status procedure and relief from a final order.
• Outcome: Remanded. The union's objections were referred to the ALJ for consideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b).
• Key point: Once an ALJ settlement order becomes final, a late objection seeking to vacate it must be evaluated as a request for relief under Rule 60(b).

Full text (OSHRC public release)

Docket No. 00-0954 Northwest Airlines, Inc.

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Complainant,
v. OSHRC Docket No. 00-0954
NORTHWEST AIRLINES, INC.,
Respondent.

ORDER

Before: ROGERS, Chairman; and EISENBREY, Commissioner.

BY THE COMMISSION:

On February 6, 2001, the Executive Secretary received a copy of a letter submitted by

the AFL-CIO, Air Transport District 143, International Association of Machinists and
Aerospace Workers, ("the Union"), to Judge Stephen J. Simko, Jr., objecting to the judge's
December 8, 2000, order approving a settlement agreement between the Secretary and
Northwest Airlines, Inc. ("Northwest"). (1) On February 9, 2001, the Executive Secretary
received a second objection letter directly from the Union, in which the Union noted that the
judge had not ruled or responded to the first objection letter.

In both objection letters, the Union claims that it had requested party status in this

case, but did not receive notification of the proposed settlement and was not given an
opportunity for input prior to the settlement agreement's approval. (2) Therefore, the Union
seeks to have the judge's approval order "vacated." Since the Union's letters were received
by the Executive Secretary after the judge's order had already become final, any relief from
that order can only be granted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Accordingly,
we refer the matter to the judge to decide what relief, if any, is appropriate under Rule 60(b).

/s/

Thomasina V. Rogers

Chairman

/s/

Ross Eisenbrey

Commissioner

Dated: March 5, 2001

1. Judge Simko's order became a final order of the Commission on January 17, 2001.
2. According to the documentation filed with its letters, the Union's request for party status
   was sent to the OSHA Area Office in Columbus, Ohio, not to the judge. Under the
   Commission's procedural rules, a request for party status must be filed with either the
   Executive Secretary, if the case has yet to be assigned to a judge, or the judge, if the case has
   already been assigned. See Commission Rules of Procedure 8(b) and 20(a). Here, the
   Union's request should have been filed with the judge, who was assigned the case on June
   6, 2000.